Ken Kesey once wrote, “You are on the bus or you are off the bus”. This informal, conversational excommunication deal between the Cardinal and the ex-Mayor is simply silly. “Is you is or is you ain’t” a Catholic? It would have been rude for Rudy to desist and even more rude for the Cardinal to intervene like some invading grade school cafeteria monitor. The cardinal should either accept it or plan to battne down the hatches for a storm.

This story is exactly why people make comments and jokes about the Roman Catholic Religion. Egan was rude and to publicly announce this to the world is ridiculous. Perhaps he wants to meet with G. to take the Eucharist back?

Egan’s statement does not address the fact that Giuliani is on his third marriage. Catholics who divorce and remarry without getting an annulment from the church cannot receive Communion.

A spokesman for Egan said that the cardinal referred to the abortion issue rather than to Giuliani’s marital history because the agreement that Giuliani would not receive Communion pre-dated his divorce from his second wife, Donna Hanover.

Wouldn’t the logical thing for the Cardinal to say have been “You broke our agreement but it doesn’t matter because you can’t get the good stuff anyway, having divorced and remarried.”
And isn’t “God” checking these things? Wouldn’t “he” invalidate the communion even as he swallowed? Untransubstantiate it? Surely “God” can over-ride a simple priest. What’s all the excitement about?

Why shouldn’t he take communion? I would think that would be between Giuliani and his “conscience”. What happened to a conversation between a church member and a Cardinal (in this case, Egan) being private? It is obvious that Egan has no discretion. The RCC certainly needs more publicity like another hole in the head.

How disgusting to take private religious matters and try to use them to shame and discredit Guiliani this way.
Egan should be more concerned if Guiliani is doing his own version of “tikkun olam” – repair of the world, like charitable works, public advocacy, etc, instead of this one religious rite. I can’t take the notion of “all or none”, which itself seems to very depending on who is doing the interpreting.
So, is one is Catholic, per Egan, does that mean one can’t have a deep and meaningful relationship with God and one is consigned to Hell for not following his view of the Christian Bible and Catholic faith?
How does this encourage a person to continue to call themself Catholic if they hold a different view (than Egan, for instance) of how to live?

oy……….. seems to vary, not “very”….

I can’t believe I’m chiming in on this side of the issue, but rules are rules. Just because one is Catholic does not mean one is eligible to recieve communion. If you are a believing Catholic one would think you would believe that it is a sin to receive if one is not supposed to — and their a many reasons that one may be ineligible. Everything from doubting the “True Presence” to being in a state of grave mortal sin, to not observing the pre-communion fast can disqualify you. Granted, most of the time the decision is left to the individual, but self-examination of one’s conscience is part of the ritual. For years my mother and father went to mass but did not receive because they practiced birth control — not because some priest told them not to, but because of their understanding of the sacrament and its requirements.

“Just because one is Catholic does not mean one is eligible to recieve communion.”
Of course not, how could you run a theocracy like that?!
First you have to raise people to think they need it then you have to deny it to them unless they do what you want.
I suppose next Pastafarianism will come up with a special sauce we all need but can’t get unless we buy their meatballs. Well, maybe not; that seems to be a religion for the rest of us.

I think you are all missing the point.
This is yet another case where the RCC is being victimized by an individual and/or group.
If it is not women wanting to take a man’s place by becoming a priest. We all know that in no time in history has any religion permitted female priests. Had God wanted females to be equal to males….He would have created females with a brain to think, a heart to love, and hands that are ready to serve.
Then it is HO-mo-SEX-uals trying to live their lives together creating families…caring for children….paying taxes….contributing to the communities in which they live. Had God wanted there to be HO-mo-SEX-ual….God would have created them. Had God wanted them to marry….why would God have created the priesthood and at time required priests to be unmarried to women?
Heterosexuals utilizing birth control. Had God wanted there to be birth control God would have created mankind capable of creating it and wise enough to use it.
I could go on and on and on…but, you get the point at how the poor helpless, powerless Church is being victimized by the big bad people and groups.
Since all other Catholics (who are not R Guiliani) follow the rules….I think the Cardinal did the only thing he could be publically calling attention to R Guiliani taking communion.
Obviously my whole post to this point is nonsense….much as this whole situation is nonsense
IMHO, R Guiliani’s taking communion is between Guiliani and the good Lord. I think the Cardinal is being petty.
Peace!

I guess whoremongering and incest are fine but not using American government to further Vatican policy — that’s unacceptable.